Shock Freeze A Harbinger Of Things To Come? The Many Signs Of More Cooling!

As Europe and USA brace for more frigid weather, some are asking if this is what we need to expect to cope with in the future.

Now it’s clear that the recent “record warm” 2 years had little to do with CO2, and instead were almost entirely due to the well-known El-Nino phenomenon over the past two years.

And now that the recent El Nino has disappeared, temperatures globally are in a free fall and back at levels of the previous decade and indications show a further drop.

The ENSO now in cool phase

Unfortunately even that enhanced layer of CO2 we have in the atmosphere was not able to trap any of the recent heat. The 20-year pause remains pretty much intact, and will be extended as the El Nino Southern Oscillation (ENSO) hovers near the cooling La Nina territory.

Note that it will take the cooler equatorial Pacific surface temperatures a few months to make there way into the lower tropospheric satellite data. Don’t be surprised if this year we see a repeat of 1999.

According to global warming theory, the earth is supposed to warm some 2.0 to 4.5¬∞C by 2100, which means 0.2 ‚Äì 0.45¬∞C per decade. So shouldn’t the recent El Nino have warmed the globe some 0.4 to 0.8¬∞C more than 1998? Not even close, as the speedometer below shows! For hardcore warmists, it is increasingly becoming a huge challenge to explain the glaring lack of warming so far this century.

GUY MOOSBURGER

Of course there has to be a case where you can determine nature climate warming from man-made co2 warming before making a statement like ‘This is driving mechanism of Global Warming.’. Since there isnt any evidence and probably impossible to determine why are you so sure? Oh right this is your way of expressing for your disillusions. My brother-in-law uses Chem-Trail Conspiracies. I guess it better than the believing in fake moon landing.

amirlach

Trouble is, Co2 alone does not “absorb” enough heat to cause any alarming amount of warming. This is why the Co2 Socialists dreamed up the Positive Water Vapor Feedback, which has been programed into all of the models.

The “theory” is that rising Co2 will cause a rise in water vapor in the atmosphere. And everyone knows that Water Vapor is the dominant “greenhouse” gas.

This positive feedback simply does not exist in the real world and in fact water vapor has declined in contradiction to the failed Man Made Global Warming Hypothesis.
“An analysis of NASA satellite data shows that water vapor, the most important greenhouse gas, has declined in the upper atmosphere causing a cooling effect that is 16 times greater than the warming effect from man-made greenhouse gas emissions during the period 1990 to 2001.” https://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/03/06/nasa-satellite-data-shows-a-decline-in-water-vapor/

If greenhouses gases are warming the planet that warming will happen first in the cold blob of air 8-12 km above the tropics. It‚Äôs freezing cold up there, but it ought to be slightly less freezing cold thanks to greenhouse gases. All 20-odd climate models predict warming there first‚Äîit‚Äôs the fingerprint of greenhouse gas warming, as opposed to warming by some other cause, like solar magnetic effects, volcanic eruptions, solar irradiance, or ozone depletion etc etc.”

There is only one denier here Bill. You. Stop denying the scientific method, which clearly states, that when your prediction is wrong, your “theory” is wrong.

“‚ÄúThe lack of a tropical upper tropospheric hotspot in the observations is the main reason for the disconnect in the above plots, and as I have been pointing out this is probably rooted in differences in water vapor feedback. The models exhibit strongly positive water vapor feedback, which ends up causing a strong upper tropospheric warming response (the ‚Äúhot spot‚Äù), while the observation‚Äôs lack of a hot spot would be consistent with little water vapor feedback.‚Äù ‚Äî Roy Spencer